Mangina Services Network praises women again

A staggeringly moronic “article” by a monumentally obtuse spazzed-out fuck-brained nutjob that doesn’t really deserve any comment, except for derisive sniggering and hoots of laughter.

Women have achieved financial independence and are better at saving indeed. Pffft!

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 7:38 PM

——————————————————-

At 7:58 PM, ditchthebitch said…

1. “You get what you give.”
(Unless you’re a woman, of course, because women give nothing and expect everything to be handed to them and done for them by a network of men and big daddy government.

2. “Respect is something you have to earn.”
(Unless you’re a woman, then respect is something you simply DEMAND and never bother to earn.)

3. “Accountability and responsibility are the cornerstones of character.”
(Unless you’re a woman, because women are not accountable for their actions- they simply blame someone else for their actions, mistakes and/or bad decisions and /or crimes and are excused and barely ever punished.)

4. “Hard work leads to success.”
(Unless your a woman, because women use deception, manipulation and fraud to get what they want, so they don’t feel they need to make any effort at all in life or make any worthwhile contribution. Women laugh at people behind their backs who work hard.)

5. “Commit the crime, do the time.”
(Unless you’re a woman- refer to no. 3)

6. “Adultery will destroy your marriage.”
(Unless your a woman, then you can just blame your adultry on your husband for not “meeting your needs” or some other lame, stupid excuse)

7. “Marriage requires commitment.”
(Unless you’re a woman, because a woman is fickle and bases her decisions on her ‘feelings,’ so then she just files a ‘no fault’ divorce whenever the wind is blowing through her head the wrong direction one day and ejects her husband out of his own house on some arbitrary whim.)

8. “Right is right and wrong is wrong.”
(Unless you’re a woman, of course.)

9. “Real friends come through loyalty and consistency.”
(Unless you’re a woman, because women feel loyalty is a sign of weakness and women are infamously inconsistent, therefore women never really have any ‘real’ friends.

10. “What goes around comes around.”
(Sorry ladies, this one applies to you as well, and women ‘get it’ ‘coming around’ harder than anyone else in the end. Can you say, “Anna Nicole Smith?” Isn’t payback a BITCH, bitch?”)

——————————————————-

At 1:22 AM, LtRand said…

Evidently MRA’s and other traditional groups suffer a form of social psychosis according to this “research”. Thought you might like a read.

——————————————————-

At 1:30 AM, mfsbo said…

“Please note that articles on MSN Money do not constitute regulated financial advice, which recommends a course of action based upon the specifics of your personal circumstances.”

Translation – We are media whores and PROUD of it, and of the fact that we have conned so many gullible, sheep like women into thinking they know what the hell they’re doing.

——————————————————-

At 8:36 AM, Darren said…

As was pointed out recently, they are only better at saving in the sense of “Ooooh today I saved £5 off this £260 handbag!”

Sarah Modlock’s moldy conclusions conflict with two sources previously cited in articles at the Daily Mail.

The First article linked also in Eternal Bachelor archives satirically subtitled, Empowered women and their empowering debt (Jan. 07) and the Second, Women victimized by their failure to save. (Feb. 07)

First article source: The Consumer Credit Counseling Service (CCCS) says that 61 per cent of the people it recommends to go bankrupt are women – three quarters of these are single.

However, more than half of these women refuse to take this drastic step, seeing it as a sign of shame and failure.

Second article source: Research from financial services firm Axa found that during 2006 men out-saved women by a multiple of 1.5 times, setting aside £5.3 billion more in total.

That apart, let’s briefly look at the source from which this why women wear the money trousers article is based. The source article for that can be found here.

Evidentially men saved 6.37% while women saved 6.84% between March and May of 2006. All their fuss is supported by three months of less than a negligible .5 percent difference. A whopping advantage of 0.47% is shown and women are gloated as superior savers. Pathetic.

The amount women save as a percentage of their average monthly income is more than 1% higher than last spring at 6.84% – one of their highest ever levels and more than that saved by men (6.37%)for the first time since the Quarterly Savings Survey began in 2004.

The survey of peoples’ savings habits and likelihood to save in the future was carried out by TNS Phonebus among 1522 GB adults aged 16+ between March 2006 and May 2006.

There are other flaws in Sara Moldlock’s conclusions, but that’s all the time I care to spend on this. It goes to show how fems grasp at every straw to exalt women and belittle men. This would not even be a subject I’d have commented on, if Sara and NS&I wouldn’t have moronically blown a trifle percentage out of proportion, in order to sneer at men and place women on a pedestal.

Come to think of it, I can’t even read my E-mail without getting girl power shoved down my throat now. Earlier Yahoo had two feminist propagandizing articles with big pictures on their front page. One was entitled, What are you doing to empower women in your community?

This question has garnered over 1000 answers. The comments that annoy me most actually come from kowtowing pansy boys.

E.g., As silly as it might sound, in the U.S., I reinforce the idea of a woman’s right to choose, whatever she might choose. I consider myself neither “pro life” nor “pro choice”; I consider myself this: I will never have a uterus, I will never give birth. . .

E.g., I encourage and support women to not accept stereotypes and be strong. Don’t accept cultural norms. Don’t be weak when you know you have the power to kick some serious butt.

E.g., As we all know women gives sacrifice in the form of mother ,sister wife.Women can bear more than a man could ever and this is the gift of god.

Anyway, the headline for the other Yahoo article was something about girl power. . .

——————————————————-

At 6:27 AM, Anonymous said…

Unrelated to post.

I recently watched the 2006 remake of “The Wicker Man”, a film which was been universally bagged. It was not a good film by any stretch however it’s premise was spot on. A crazed colony of women luring a well intentioned man to his doom. The film won’t win any Oscars but it has won my respect.

——————————————————-

At 1:36 PM, Paul Parmenter said…

Respect to misogynic gent for debunking this tripe article and pointing us towards the truth. It is an important reminder that you have to dig under the surface of these male-bashing, female-promoting items wherever you come across them in order to find the real answers; and you don’t usually have to dig far. Also the source of statistics often has a particular agenda which will not be compatible with the truth or fairness. This is the case with the NS&I, which has a vested interest in trying to make us all save more – preferably with them, of course. So we must expect their press releases to be slanted heavily in that direction. I have had a look at the NS&I site from which Modlock drew her quotations.

Now here is something interesting. She quotes from a release dated 7 June 2006. This is indeed a very anti-male, pro-female piece of propaganda. The headline is

“Women start to out-perform men in the savings race”

further quotations are

“Women more determined than men” and

“Women’s saving success this quarter may be due to the strong focus they have on saving. Women have been consistently more ambitious savers than men, aspiring to contribute more of their income to savings than men”

But wait: among later publications on the site is the NS&I Quarterly Savings Survey, autumn 2006. This tells a very different story:

“Saving enough is a problem for women

Women’s saving levels have consistently trailed behind men according to the Quarterly Savings Survey and this quarter the gap appears to be widening. The figure for the average amount being saved by British men in autumn 2006 is the highest recorded since the survey began: £112.18 (autumn 2005: £107.21, autumn 2004: £98.59). For women this figure (£72.17) has dropped from £72.74 in summer 2006, but is up year on year from £70.52 in 2005 and £64.42 in 2004.”

So the June 2006 release was, to say the least, somewhat premature in its insistence that women were about to triumph over men in another sphere. But note that Modlock’s article was dated March 2007! Why did she not quote from a more up-to-date survey which showed a more accurate long-term picture? And why am I asking such a daft question?

So what is the proper picture? Men save more than women in absolute terms. This should not surprise us; men earn more. Women however save a higher proportion of their earnings. That should not surprise us either; men have to spend a huge proportion of their earnings on their women and children, mortgages and household expenses. Women cn the other hand can save a higher proportion of their income because they don’t have the same financial commitments as men. Women also tend to think of their earnings as their personal money, while men know that most of their money is largely spoken for as soon as they earn it.

So you can use those statistics to prove whatever you like: that men are “better” savers than women, or that women are “better” savers than men. All that matters is what your agenda is.

And we certainly know Sarah Modlock’s, don’t we? Her claim that “according to National Savings & Investments women are starting to overtake men as the nation’s top savers” is a downright untruth. All we have to decide is whether she was deliberately falsifying the picture, or had simply not done her homework properly. Funny how often we find ourselves facing this same question, isn’t it?